From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Jul 22 2002 - 17:46:19 MDT
Jeff Davis wrote:
> Extropes,
>
>
> True, but so what? My inclusion of the modifier
> 'religious' was parenthetical. But now that you bring
The "so what" is that the problems we face are difficult enough
without mistaken and/or unnecessary attribution.
> it up, is there any doubt that the US is currently in
> the sway of atavistic Christianity, and not the
> tolerant, forgiving kind, but rather the dangerous
> inquisitional-tending kind? Old men approaching
Yes. That notion is absurd at this time. I would be dead or
under torture at this moment if any such thing were true. I am
very surprised to see you claim such. The US is still very much
a secular country and the separation of church and state, while
often contested, holds and is supported by religious and
non-religious people alike. That is not to say there isn't a
large body who would like to turn the US into a theocracy. But
they certainly have not acheived this and are not really even close.
> irrelevance and death, desparately trying to deny the
> truth of their decline by imposing themselves on
> others.
>
This is a different claim than claiming it is the fault of
"atavistic Christainity" supposedly controlling the country. I
know many people of many different religions and no religion who
themselves are not convinced the quest for immortality or much
longer life is reasonable and moral. If we handle the baseline
arguments well the extreeme positions will be very much weakened .
> I can be as sweetly spiritual as the next guy standing
> in awe of the universe, humble before the uncaused
> cause, but that's not the question here, is it?
>
No. Which was my point.
>
>>Calling it "Talibandry"
>>doesn't really help the problem.
>
>
> No less than calling a spade a spade ever does. Does
You did not call a spade a spade. You called a spade an
elephant's ear. :-) Please attempt to keep the rhetoric a bit
more in check and accurate.
> silence help? In any event, I wasn't about 'helping',
> I was mostly indulging in a (possilbly) clever turn of
> phrase. For some time now, I've been seeking an
> opportunity to use the term 'Talibandit". Supreme
> Mullah Leon Kass fit the bill. I can't help it if I'm
> lucky.
>
I see. You are more interested in indulging yourself than in
discussion.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:37 MST